Beitzah 12a — the Talmud in English

The Master

Beit Shammai

held: We decree concerning a hinge in the middle on account of a hinge on the side,

which resembles a fully constructed building; therefore they also prohibited the shutter with a hinge in the middle.

And the Master

Beit Hillel

held: We do not decree.

And it follows that there is no dispute between the beraitot. Rather, the first beraita informed us of the dispute between Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel in a case where they have a hinge in the middle, and therefore concluded that if they have no hinge at all, everyone agrees that it is permitted.

Whereas the second beraita informed us of the dispute in the opposite manner; that is, they disputed a case in which they have no hinge on the side, but only in the middle, and therefore concluded that “if they have a hinge”—that is, on the side—everyone agrees that it is prohibited to replace them.

The sugya before us discusses the parameters of permission for labor for the sake of food preparation on a Festival, and as an introduction we set forth the verses stated concerning labor on a Festival.

It is stated in the portion of Bo [Exodus 12:16], concerning the Festival of Passover: “And on the first day there shall be a holy convocation, and on the seventh day there shall be a holy convocation for you; no labor may be done on them, except that which may be eaten by every person, that alone may be done for you.”

By contrast, in the portion of the Festivals [Leviticus 23], permission to perform labor for the sake of food preparation was not mentioned; rather, this is what is stated there:

Concerning the Festival of Passover: “On the first day there shall be a holy convocation for you; you shall not perform any labor of work” [23:7].

Concerning the seventh day of Passover: “On the seventh day there shall be a holy convocation for you; you shall not perform any labor of work” [23:8].

Concerning the Festival of Shavuot: “There shall be a holy convocation for you; you shall not perform any labor of work” [23:21].

Concerning Rosh Hashanah: “A remembrance of the sounding of the shofar, a holy convocation; you shall not perform any labor of work” [23:24].

Concerning Sukkot: “On the first day there shall be a holy convocation; you shall not perform any labor of work” [23:35].

Concerning Shemini Atzeret: “On the eighth day there shall be a holy convocation; you shall not perform any labor of work” [23:36].

Whereas concerning Shabbat and Yom Kippur it is stated: “And you shall not perform any labor” [23:3, 28].

And Ramban wrote that in all the Festivals “labor of work” was stated, to exclude labor for the sake of food preparation, which is permitted on a Festival, for it is considered “labor of enjoyment,” and is not included in “labor of work.” Only concerning Shabbat and Yom Kippur was a prohibition stated concerning “labor” without qualification, because all labor is prohibited on them.

And he cited in the name of Rabbeinu Hananel that this is why the verse in the portion of Bo needed explicitly to permit labor for the sake of food preparation: Since it says there, “No labor may be done,” labor for the sake of food preparation is also included in this expression, until the verse excluded it from the general rule. In the other Festivals it was stated briefly that only “labor of work” was prohibited, and his words were cited in the Sefer HaHinukh [mitzva 298]. See also the words of Ibn Ezra in the portion of Bo.

Mishna:

Carrying out from one domain to another, when done for the sake of food preparation, is permitted on a Festival according to everyone.

However, Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel disputed carrying out when it is not for the sake of food preparation:

Beit Shammai say: One may not carry out

on a Festival

neither a child

to take him for a walk, and even to circumcise him,

nor a lulav

for the purpose of shaking it,

nor a Torah

scroll

to read from it, from a private domain

to a public domain,

because this is not carrying out for the sake of food preparation, and on a Festival only labor for the sake of food preparation was permitted.

And Beit Hillel permit,

for the reason that will be explained in the Gemara.

Gemara:

A tanna taught before Rabbi Isaac bar Avdimi: One who slaughters a voluntary burnt offering on a Festival—

is flogged,

since he transgressed “You shall not perform any labor” 3a () when he performed labor for the sake of a burnt offering that is not eaten, and the Torah permitted slaughtering on a Festival only of a burnt offering that is an obligation of the day.

He said to him

Rabbi Yitzhak, to the tanna:

that which

this beraita says,

whose is it,

from whose words is it? — It must be from the words of

Beit Shammai, who say: “Since carrying out for the purpose of

food for a person’s sustenance

has been permitted, it too has been permitted when not for the purpose of

food for a person’s sustenance.” Therefore, they did not permit slaughtering a burnt-offering that is not for the purpose of food for a person’s sustenance.

For if

according to the view of

Beit Hillel, they said

in our Mishna that it is permitted to carry out things that are not food for a person’s sustenance, it must be that they held that

since carrying out for the purpose of

food for a person’s sustenance

has also been permitted

carrying out

when not for the purpose!

And according to them,

here too,

the same law is that slaughtering which is not for the purpose of food for a person’s sustenance, but for the purpose of the Most High, has been permitted.

For

since slaughtering for the purpose of

a person’s food for his sustenance

has also been permitted when not for the purpose of

a person, and although a burnt-offering is not eaten, it is permitted to slaughter for the purpose of offering it, even if it is a voluntary offering; so why should he be liable to lashes?

Rabba raised an objection against this: From where is it that Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel —

disagree about this?

Perhaps

even according to Beit Hillel we do not say “since,” and our Mishna, which deals with carrying out and not with slaughtering, is agreed upon by all.

And the subject of our Mishna is

a

different question entirely:

whether there is an enactment of

eruv

of courtyards,

and

whether there is a prohibition of the labor of

carrying out

only

for Shabbat, and there is no

enactment at all of

eruv

of courtyards,

and

there is no prohibition at all of

carrying out on a Festival.

Or perhaps the prohibition of carrying out and the enactment of an eruv of courtyards apply also on a Festival —

And in this

they disagree

Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel, as the Gemara explains:

One master,

Beit Shammai,

held:

there is

an eruv and carrying out for Shabbat and

there is

an eruv and carrying out for a Festival. Therefore, on a Festival only carrying out for the purpose of food for a person’s sustenance was permitted.

Therefore, on a Festival only carrying out for the purpose of preparing food is permitted.

And one master,

Beit Hillel,

held:

there is

an eruv of carrying out for Shabbat, but there is no eruv and carrying out for a Festival,

and therefore it is permitted to carry out on a Festival also things that are not needed for food for a person’s sustenance.

And that the source distinguishes between Shabbat and a Festival specifically with regard to the labor of carrying out is proven

as it is written

in the words of the prophet Jeremiah, chapter 17,

“And do not carry a burden out of your houses on the day of Shabbat.”

And so we should infer from the verse:

On Shabbat —

there is no,

do not carry out!

But

on a Festival —

not

was carrying out prohibited for you!

And it follows that Beit Hillel too can hold as we learned in the beraita, that one who slaughters a voluntary burnt-offering on a Festival is liable to lashes, because the labor of slaughtering was not permitted on a Festival when not for a purpose; for we stated this principle only with regard to carrying out, which was not prohibited on a Festival.

Rav Yosef raised an objection against Rabba

against Rabba:

But if that is so,

that according to Beit Hillel carrying out was not prohibited at all on a Festival —

let Beit Hillel disagree

with Beit Shammai also

regarding

the carrying out of

stones, and let them inform us that according to their view it is permitted to carry out on a Festival into the public domain even stones, whereas on Shabbat even moving them within the house is prohibited! And one cannot say that moving stones is prohibited because of muktze, for the entire enactment of the prohibition of moving stones on Shabbat was intended to prevent the obstacle of carrying out [and the reason they did not enact that foods and vessels should not be moved was that the public could not endure such an enactment]; and if there is no prohibition of carrying out on a Festival, there is no reason to enact a prohibition against moving stones on a Festival!?

and let them teach us that according to their opinion it is permitted to carry stones out into the public domain on a Festival, even though on Shabbat it is prohibited even to move them within the house! And one cannot say that moving stones is prohibited because of muktzeh, because the entire enactment prohibiting the moving of stones on Shabbat was intended to prevent the violation of carrying out [and the reason they did not enact a prohibition against moving food and vessels was that the public could not uphold such an enactment]. If there is no prohibition against carrying out on a Festival, there is no reason to enact a prohibition against moving stones on a Festival!?

And

Rav Yosef proves:

Rather, from the fact that Beit Hillel do not disagree

Beit Hillel

concerning stones —

infer from it

that according to everyone carrying out is considered a labor on a Festival, and it was permitted only for the purpose of food for a person’s sustenance, like the other labors.

[And the fact that Jeremiah warned them specifically concerning Shabbatot was not because there is no prohibition of carrying out on a Festival, but because the prohibitions of Shabbat are stringent, for one is stoned for them, and he hoped that they would listen to him and refrain from carrying out at least on Shabbat — Rashi].

And only

concerning carrying out when not for a purpose do they disagree,

for Beit Hillel held that according to Torah law it is permitted through the principle that since it was permitted for the purpose of food for a person’s sustenance, [and only the Sages prohibited it when one troubles himself with it without a purpose] , and Beit Shammai prohibited it according to Torah law when it is performed not for the purpose of food for a person’s sustenance.

And the Gemara adds:

And Rabbi Yohanan too holds

that Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel

disagree over “since carrying out was permitted for a need, it was also permitted not for a need.”

And according to everyone, carrying out is considered a labor according to the Torah on Yom Tov.

For a tanna taught before Rabbi Yohanan: One who cooks the sciatic nerve in milk on Yom Tov, and eats it—

receives five lashes.

a.

He receives lashes for cooking the nerve.

That is, for the labor of cooking on Yom Tov, since it is cooking not for a need, because he cooks a nerve that is forbidden for eating.

b.

And he receives lashes for eating the nerve

of the sciatic nerve.

c.

And he receives lashes for cooking meat with milk. [

And for that he also receives lashes on a weekday].

d.

And he receives lashes for eating meat

the nerve that was cooked

in milk.

e.

And he receives lashes ![](pamud.bmp "

exact location of the page")

for

the labor of

kindling

of the fire beneath the vessel in which he cooks.